Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-05/26/1994Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hall Jotm Holzapfel. Vice President 53095 Main Road William G Albertson P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765q1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES MAY 26, 1994 PRESENT WERE: Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President John Holzapfel, Vice-President Peter Wenczel, Trustee Martin Garrell, Trustee William G. Albertson, Trustee Diane J. Herbert, Clerk WORKSESSION: 6:00 p.m. CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE NEXT TRUSTEE BOARD MEETING: Thurs. June 30, 1994 at 7 pm WORKSESSION: 6:00 p.m. NEXT FIELD INSPECTION: Thurs. June 23, 1994 at 12 noon WORKSESSION: 4:00 APPROVE MINUTES: April 28, 1994 Minutes were not available for a vote of approval. I. MONTHLY REPORT: Trustees monthly report for April 1994: A monthly check for $6,702.16 was forwarded to the Supervisor's Office for the General Fund. II. PUBLIC NOTICES: Public Notices are posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board for review. III. AMENDMENTS/WAiVERS/CHANGES: J. Eh-Consultants Inc., on behalf of BARBARA CIEPLINSKI requests an amendment to Permit ~ 4245 as per DEC Permit to install a 4' X 210' wood chip path, a 4' X 130' catwalk, a 4' X 93' open pile dock, a 4' X 16' ramp, a 6' X 20' float and two pilings and to plant the existing foot path with Baccharis halimiflora on 4' centers. Located 720 Orchard Lane, Southold. SCTM ~89-3-9 & p/o 8.1 TRUSTEE HOLZAPFEL moved to approve, TRUSTEE GARRELL seconded. ALL AYES ~?~oard of Trustees 2 May 26, 1994 2. THOMAS PALMER requests an amendment to Permit ~678 to move catwalk, ramp & float 90' west on same property. Located 2140 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM 9123-4-4 TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to approve, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. D~L AYES 3. PIERRE GAZARIAN requests an amendment to Permit ~4150 to construct a fence on top of an existing bulkhead. Located 860 Willow Terrace Lane, Orient. SCTM ~26-2-47 TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL moved~to approve with a 15' vegetated buffer, TRUSTEE GARRELL seconded. ALL AYES 4. JOHN J. BOPP, JR. requests an amendment to Permit #3795 to modify the height of the dock and catwalk to 3 1/2' above ground level. The 4-6" locust stakes will be replaced with 6" pressure treated poles. An additional 6' X 16' floating dock 12' away from current dock will be held by 2 6-8" pressure treated poles, a 3' wide ramp connected the dock to the floating dock. Located 175 Maple Ave., Mattituck. SCTM %89-3-11.5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to table the application, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES 5. Joseph Fischetti, Jr. on behalf of DAVID & CLAIRE AIR requests a waiver to construct a 4' high wood fence extending from existing fence. Located Village Lane and Right of Way north of Orient Wharf Co., Orient. SCTM %24-1-27 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to table the application, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES 6. John Bertani Builders on behalf of CINDY BENEDETTO requests a waiver to construct a 16' X 22' addition to her home with concrete steps to basement and a concrete walkway around the addition to obtain easier access to the new concrete basement stairs. Located 910 Maple Lane, East Marion. SCTM #35-5-26 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the waiver with condition that the concrete walkway be of pervious stone surface and not concrete, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES 7. HELEN ~ requests a waiver to construct a 32' X 32' garage foundation as per applicant 5/23/94. Located 1780 Great Peconic Bay Blvd., Laurel. SCTM 9t45-4-2.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI advised to give a letter of non-jurisdiction. (No motion is required for a non-jurisdiction) 8. Samuels & Steetman on behalf of THOMAS & JOANKELLY - request a waiver to construct 24' X 20' deck and a 22, x 24, garage-attached to existing house. Located 1050 West Cove Road, Nassau Point, Cutchogue. SCTM ~11-5-1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve for a waiver, TRUSTEE HOLZA~HEL seconded. ALL AYES (Refund $110) 9. ANN BERRYMAN requests a waiver to construct a 6' high vinyl fence 55' along her western property line, or if possible extend out to the beach as pedestrians and deer coming from 'Board of Trustees 3 May 26, 1994 Youngs Road are eroding the beach and cutting through her property. Located 2100 Youngs Road, Orient. SCTM ~18-2-1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to table application until fence is staked by a licensed surveyor, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES 10. JO~ ~. DEF~PSEY requests an extension on amendment to Permit 91965 to add a 3' X 60' catwalk in a straight path. Located 705 Meday Ave., Mattituck. SCTM ~i13-8-14.2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the amendment, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to go off the regular meeting and go onto the Public gearings, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES IV'. PUBLIC HEARINGS: THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN.THE MATTER OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS UNDER THE WETLANDS ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. I HAVE AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM T~E SUFFOLK TIMES AND AN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION FROM THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN. PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE MAY BE READ PRIOR TO ASKING FOR COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS ORGANIZED AND BRIEF: FIVE (5) MINUTES OR LESS~ IF POSSIBLE ~:30 p.m. In the matter of Docko Inc., on behalf of'KATHERINE ~ %o recOnstruct 55+/- 1.f. of 6' wide fixed wo~d dock replacing stone filled wood cribs with driven piles for support and maintain a 16' X 10' floating dock including support piles. Located Sterling Street, Fishers Island. SCTM 910-9-6 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak either in favor or against this application? Would the Board like to make any comment on this? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: We looked a this when we were over there in April and it fit in with what was there. No we didn't have any prOblems with it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any questions? Someone have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would you like to make a motion on that Peter? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I make a motion that we approve the application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Second? TRUSTEE' HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 7:31 p.m. - In the matter of~DENNtS~KEDJIERSKI to reconstruct an existing single family dwelling, adding a Second floor, a~7' front and side porch and gravel driveway. Construct a 27' X 20' two-car garage on the existing concrete parking area and in addition, remove approx. 2,000 s.f. of concrete parking area from in front of the house. Also remove a small concrete block ~Board of Trustees 4 May 26, 1994 smoke house and shed. Remove approx. 1,5000 S.f. of concrete patio and two concrete ramps from the rear and sides of the bourse as per the drawing, and replace it with a 12' X 20' timber deck and stairs attached to the rear of the house. Replace the solid filled timber pier with an open piling pier. Construct a 6' X 40' floating dock (with a 5' X 10' extension for a gang way) on four pilings at the end of the existing pier. Install water and electric service to the dock. Located Sage Blvd., Arshamomoque, Southotd. SC~ ~53-5-12.2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? MR. KEDJIERSKI: i~m coming up with a plan for this property and I've studied the tidal wetlands regulations Part 661 very thoroughly and I think that I've come up with a plan that is ecologically an improvement on the property that is there. I've tried to keep all work within the confines of that document and I believe also I will be making an aesthetic improvement to this property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to add to that or speak against the application? I think it's the feeling of the Board that its a tremendous improvement on the property and we're relieved and if the Board has no further comment I'd entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do you want to make a motion? TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: I'd just .... the normal numher~of hay bales and all that Stuff? I' would make a motion that we approve the appliCation with hay bales to the seaward side. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That will be in place du~ing construction. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES 7:34 p.m. In the matter of SANFORD FRIEMANN to extend existing dock 100' Request permit for existing beach house and deck that was built in the i950's as per survey dated as received February 7, 1994. Located Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk. scTM $1t7-3-8.4 TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Is there anybody' Who would like to speak for this aPpliCation? Is there anybody who would like to speak against this application? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I have some comments. I don't have a problem with the application for the beach house and renovations that have been there, but I feel the length of the dock is very excessive in that area. It will make the enti~e structure there much larger than anything that eXists anpwhere in that area and that it's my feeling that it should be denied. I think it sets a dangerous precedent for that stretch of beach. It is a danger to navigation and completely unnecessary. TRUSTEE GARRELL: I think this has become a matter of principle. This is the question that we have gone over with people in Town and among ourselves, and there seems tobe a problem with just how far you can go with docks and people sort of 'leap frogging' out with longer and longer docks and the Board of Trustees 5 May 26, 1994 last thing you need is something that looks like a Coney Island pier which appears at the end of the process ten years down the line, and that's why I have problems with it too. It's the beginning of a process that's disturbing as far as the Bays are concerned. I think that people seem to... it's the vibration that we get as well. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Can I have a motion? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: I'll make a motion that we grant the permit to rebuild the beach house and deck that was originally built in the 1950's as marked on the survey that we have received. And that we deny the application for the dock extension. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Do I have a second? TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: What I was going to say is do you want to make a coJ~,~ent to the fact that the denial rests on public health and safety? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Well yes, I think that's what we said before in the Public'Hearing. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: So we have a motion to accept and deny the application. All those in favor of Peter's motion? ALL AYES. (TRUSTEE KRUPSKI DID NOT TAKE PART IN T~E PUBLIC HEARING OR IN ANY OF TR~ REVIEW OF THAT APPLICATION) 7:40 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN & ~RY MUR~HY to construct a 3' X 130' timber catwalk which will be elevated 3 1/2' over grade. Located 230~Inlet Lane, Greenport. SCTM ~43-5-4 & 18 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone here who would like to speak against this application? I want to check on the CAC comments here. "CAC recommended approval". TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I looked at this and I would like to make some comments. It's appropriate in the area there. It goes over a nice marsh for Gull Pond. It allows these people access to the beach, the neighbors all have them, it prevents them from trampling down the marsh and its appropriate. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Peter is there any special condition for the 3 1/2' rather than 4'. That just bothers me a little bit. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Why does it bother you? TRUSTEE HOLZAPREL: Because of the covering, your getting lower. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But it's a narrower catwalk° TRUSTEE WENCZEL: It a narrow catwalk, I think it goes over water also. I have no problem with 3 1/2' and if we want to go more ..... I think what's gonna happen is from looking at it I'll bet you that 3 1/2' is gonna allow them to start on the upland and just go across, without having a step or two to get up on it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? Can I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE HOLZAP~EL: So moved. TRUSTEE AL~ERTSON: Second. ALL AYES '~Board of Trustees 6 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Want to make a motion on that Peter? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'll make a motion that we grant them the permit. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 7:42 p.m. - In the matter of ROBERT L. GARBEN to construct & 3' X 60' floating dock from bulkhead out toward channel. Located 3575 Wells Ave., 350' east of Oaklawn Ave., Southold. SCT~ ~70-4-5 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this application, either in favor or against? Let me read the CAC comments first. "CAC reco~mL~ends disapproval of the plan as submitted because at low tide the 60' floating dock would set on the bottom. Council suggests applicant install a 3~ wide catwalk beginning at the top lip of the bulkhead leading to the floating dock and they .reco~m~end a 20' X 6' dock. T~e new configuration would not exceed the 60' intrusion into the creek. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: It says inspected floating docks not appropriate here and need to have a catwalk that leads to a ramp and float. Once that's submitted it should go no further than the neighbors dock and it should go no further than a third of the way into the channel. This plan is inappropriate in that area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would you agree then with the CAC comments at all? TRUSTEE~WENCZEL: Yes, that's part of the problem. Should we maks a suggestion on it? I think we have to deny it, because it's a Type II. Then they can re-apply. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'd rather table it 'cause they paid their fee and we did the review and if we made an amendment, and they could amend it and we could vote on it and we wouldn't have to have another Public Hearing. ~TRUSTEE WENCZEL: The problem is that's essentially ...... OK TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: We can suspend the Public ~earing right? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No we'll close it. We had it. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: But the application will be a whole new think. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No we can get an amendment. Then we can vote on it. Oh, I see what you mean, it will be a whole new application to be a Public Hearing on. OK. I'll take a motion to suspend the Public ~earing. TRUSTEE GARRELL: So moVed. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES 7:46 p.m. - In the matter of DAI~I~L~.J. MAGGIO to construct a 3' X 35' dock, a 3' X 10' ramp and a 6' X 15' floating dock. Located 3635 Wells Road, Peconic. SCTM 986-2-I1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to co~ent on this application? PATRICIA MOORE: We're here on behalf of Mr. & Mrs. Maggio and I believe we amended our application to conform, with the Trustees recommendation on the width of the dock as well as~the extension from the 5' contour. ~oard of Trustees 7 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other comment? As the applicant has amended the project at our request, does the Board members have any comment on it? DO I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do I have a motion to approve the application as amended? TRUSTEE GARRELL: So moved. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES 7:47 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN & MARY KELLY to construct a 3' X 20' catwalk, a 3' X 12' ramp, two 4' x 10' floats and one 6' X 11' docking float to be taken out each winter. Located 2900 Beebe Drive, Cutchoque. SCTM #103-3-15 TRUSTEE KRUFSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this application? Anyone here who would like to speak against this application? CAC recommends approval provided spartina is planted 'above the MHWmark and install a catwalk about 10' past the vegetated area to the floats as far as 40'. Where do they want spartina? That's vegetated there. I looked at this. I don't where he would want to plant spartina? It's a very big drop off from the lawn, it's a fairly steep but low bank and it's vegetated. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Otherwise he'd have a ramp on the entire .... up to the long ramp. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Are they gonna be sitting on the bottom. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think so. This was held up from last month. TRUSTEE GARRELL: ~oving those floats doesn't cause any disturbance up on the bank. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: And he's not extending very far into the creek itself. There's a tremendous amount of creek there. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: It's my feeling that we have a policy of allowing the minimum structure, the catwalk leading to a ramp and float. We just denied somebody's application because they had a lot of floats and more coverage than necessary. I think we have to be. consistent. Two 4' X 10' floats and then a 6' X 11' docking float is a bit ....... TRUSTEE ~: Well your total length is 31'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: 36' really, because you"re keeping it at a "'T". It's a very small, I mean they're 4' X i0' floats. Normally someone would come in with a 6' X 20'. So your small there to start with. And you're gonna have a catwalk. He has those. I spoke with Mr. Kelly, and it's unfortunate he's not here to comment. If you would like you could put a provision in this permit saying that when he has to replace the floats he'll have to do so With a permanent catwalk. He can't just have another float built. If you want to go with~that route. Or if you're.really against it. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'm only one member of the Board here. It's my opinion. TRUSTEE HOLZA~EEL: To be consistent, I think yes. TRUSTEE GARRELL: The question becomes, is how much extension does he need out into the creek? It's how he's gonna get the extension. There are some places like Deep Hole, where the Board of Trustees 8 May 26, 1994 difference between 12' and 20' is substantial where you are in the channel. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This is not a problem here. Then I suggest tabling this and I'll have to get back to Mr. Kelly to amend this application to reflect that. I don't understand the CAC's recor~t~endation. "Install catwalk about 10' past vegetated area". TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Up into the land. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It doesn't say that though. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I think we should suspend the Public Hearing an clarify the CAC comments. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES 7:54 - In the matter of THOMAS & ROBY GLUCKFu%N to construct a 22' X 45' swimming pool with a 10' x 10' deck and a 30' X 15' pool house. Located 1350 West Cove Road, Cutchogue. SCTM %111-5-2 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Anyone to speak for or against this application? CAC comments. "Recommends approval with the stipulation that the area below th~ pool be bermed off and plant beach grass to the berm bluff. All rut, off is to be contained on site. Move the pool 75' away from the existing bulkhead. Which means you would have to swing the pool 90 degrees. Right now they have it marked as 65'. MR. LOUCKA: I think there was something to do with the drop off. I think they have enough land there. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: There;s no provision for a backwash. I mean there's some things that we would like to put on the application. You can adjust it in as a requirement. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I think you need them to show us where on the Site plan, don't you think so? TRUSTEE KRLrPSKI: No, chances are it will be behind or outside our jurisdiction. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: You have to tell them. If you don't tell them it could be right here. (indicating on site plan) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But that's like a 25' high bluff there. They're not gonna put in on the bank. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I wouldn't be surprised at anything anymore. TRUSTEE GARRELL: And the further we keep away from that bank the better. TRUSTEE KRUPSKt: Any further comments? TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve with a condition that the applicant Seeks the aid of S.C.S.C. in planting and grading the area between the pool and the bluff and the disturb areas within the Trustees jurisdiction, and that the pump-out backwash for the pool drywell be put outside the Trustee jurisdiction and a staked row of haybales at the top of the bank during construction. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 7:59 p.m. - In the matter of FRANCIS S. PERRONE to replace a 6.' X 20' floating dock, a 4' X 16' ramp and walkway with piles. ~oard of Trustees 9 May ~26, I994 Located Haywaters Road, Cutchogue, Lot %22 northwesterly 25' SCTM ~11-1-21 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone who wishes to speak for or against this application? CAC comment was "approval with stipulation that spartina be planted in the bare area of the beach area above MHWmark. Make catwalk 3' wide with railings and elev. catwalk 3 1/2 ' above grade. Extend elev. catwalk within 5' of road to ramp to allow vegetation to beach area". I inspected this and we denied the Grandfather last month. We have a joint application with the DEC. They're replacing 2 X 32. Its two feet wide now so they're gonna do a 50% increase. They have pictures showing it. Do I have a motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I~ll make a motion to approve the application with a condition that they follow the CAC's recommendation and plant the beach area with spartina on one foot centers above the ~ mark, and elevate the catwalk 3 1/2' above grade in the inter tidal 'area, and the catwalk be 3' wide and not 4~ wide. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES 8:02. p.m. In the matter of OLD.COVE YACHT CLUB to construct approx. 65 1.f. ofnew timber bulkheading and backfill with approx. 50 c.y. Of upland sand. Place approx. 100 c.y. of upland sand on beachseaward of bulkhead and landward of M~W as beach nourishment. Construct a new, 6' X 150' fixed timber dock from face of new bulkhead. All Work shall be done as drawings dated 12/15/93. Located Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk. SCTM %117-5-13.. 14, & 14.2. TRUSTEE KRUPSK!: Would anyone here like to comment in favor or against this application? Board have any Comments? T~USTEE WENCZE~: This dock is 2 or 3 lo~s to the south of Mr. Friemanns dock. It is my feeling that while I have no problem with the bulkhead construction, the dock for the Old Cove Yacht Club should go no further than is Fir. Friemanns dock. It has been long poliC!r long before I was on the Board to make sure the docks are not il~ngerthan pre-existing docks and the neighboring docks. While its my feeling that 100' docks are too big on the Bay.and inappropriate the precedent is already for this dock an~iMr. Friemanns here~ I don't see the dimensions. I think its about 100'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think his neighbok's have similar length. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Do we have a scale here? Maybe I can scale this off. If we pass this it should be contingent on the dock being no longer than the neighboring dock. It appears that Mr. Friemann's dock is from his bulkhead is about 110'. It extends 90' from high water line. I think that we should allow the Old Cove Yacht Club to extend their dock up to the bulkhead but it should be no longer than 90' from normal high water mark out into the Bay. That's my feeling. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think we should have a Bay Constable stake what they consider to be the MHW mark. Board of Trustees 10 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Then he could double check this survey, that it should extend no further than high water than the neighboring dock. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Then we could get the Bay Constable to give us ~ measurement from the proposed bulkhead and we wouldn't have a measurement from high water we'd have a total bulkhead length. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I just have on other comment here. That is an explanation of why. First of all docks that are exceptionally long extending into the Bay out into navigable waters, are a hazard to boaters. Also thiS area is a historically productive Bay scallop area, while the dock that extends 100' off the beach would Probably not go far enough to interfere withany scallop activities, anything that goes any further certainly gonna be getting into territory has been an active fishery. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any other Board member have any comment? Peter, do you want to make that motion? Oh, motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE GARRELL: Motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Peter, you want to make that motion? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'll make a motion that we grant the permit for the bulkheading, for the 65' timber bulkheading and backfill with 50 c.y. of upland sand, and the placement of 100 c.y. of upland sand on the beach seaward of bulkhead and landward of MHW as beach nourishment. In that motion I suggest we grant them a permit for a dock of 6' wide but no longer than neighboring dock as measured from the high tide mark which is not to say that they cannot extend the dock to their bulkhead as they asked for. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: The final dock will not be 150'. It will be the distance between the HWM and the bullhead plus the distance from the HWM to the end of the neighboring dock. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 8:10 p.m. - In the matter of G~A~ENERB BAY to install Stairs, a 3' X 25' catwalk, a 31''X i2'-ramp, ~ 4' X 48' main float, two 3' X 14' finger floatS, one 6' X 16' finger float and pilings. Located end of Dogwood Lane, ROW south of Bayview Drive, Eas~ Marion. SC~ #37-4-17 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of this application? MR~ MATZEN: Just real fast, I have been talking before this Board for two and a half years pleading my case for Gardener's Bay Estates for 4 boats. We've met every criteria. We have DEC, and Army Corps Permits for about two years now. We've met ail criteria from'this Board as far as ecology. The CAC is for it. The North Fork Environmental Council is for it. I _don't want to keep repeating myself. You had me say the case before. I ask your indulgence. You see a sea of faces. You don't know who's here for what case, for or against. Can I have a show of hands on just people of Gardener's Bay Estates that's for this project. ~oard of Trustees ll May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That would be appropriate. Please, for this project. (Show of hands from audience) ~ow many of you are from Gardener's Bay Estates? (All hands raised are from GBE) TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Can I see the against hands again? (Show of hands against) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to speak against this application? .: I reside at 460 Bayview Drive, the owner rty is my wife Lennie Sambach. Our property border the subject property in GB~OA, and we are also members of that association. The application before you tonight is an application to install 5 boat slips o~ the ROW of the association homes. ~reviously an interpretation of the Zoning Board of Appeals was made and I'd like to submit a copy of' that and make it part of this record. (Copy attached) That interpretation that I just handed up to you basically says that this application Of GB~OA does not comply with the intent of zoning codes for the residential district in which the properties ..... All property in the Town of Southold is zoned. This zoning to an individual owner and applies to a farmer, and to a business man and it applies to an association. ~sociations are not above the law, nor do they circumvent the law. GBHOA owns the property under water. They own theiwater and property under Spring Pond. If you check ArtiCle 2 i22.G' Of the Zoning Ordinance and also i239 you will see that this property is also zoning~ The Zoning Board of Appeals code in that decision dated May of 1993 and that was 4156. In the fact that the association's property, is not comply with the intent of the ordinance either in the~ownership or in the use of the property to this accessory structure that they seek. Three approvals are necessary to bUild this 6 boat pier and float. The DEC, Army Corps Of Engineers, and a Town Permit. TheTown approval is once again requested tonight. But yet application does not fall within the g~/idelinesof the Zoning BOard Ordinance nor does it comply with them. Chapter 97 which is part of' the Town Law, which is the Wetlands Act, under Article 2 Paragraph 9721J it reads as follows. "Documentary proof that alio~er necessar~ permits and, key work here, 'apprlovals~ have been obtained. The interpretation decision of the Zoning Board of' ApPeals has not giventhis association an approval. Because the property does not comply with the Town law. The CAC in its letter of Feb. 25, 1992, recommended that this approval. Now I'll read it because it has a policy of one dock with a capacity of 4 boats on a single piece of property. "The Council does not wish to see marina's developed on property associations,~. (Mr. Sambach submitted CAC statement) This truly unique piece of property in an R48 Zone presently has 2 piers and floats on a single piece of property and it does have right now a total of 4 boats, which is the exact total the CAC suggests. The Town Trustees should not adopt a Resolution directin~ the issuance of a permit. As the Building Dept. denied the application, the Zoning Board of Appeals interpreted the code exactly the way the ~uilding Dept. did, and the CAC reco~m~ended disapproval. '. ~. ~oard of Trustees 12 May 26, 1994 The Trustees will find that the proposed operation will not conform to the standards set forth in 97-28 and I specifically quote "I" where it states the application will not adversely perfect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town. In addition, all approvals under 97-21 paragraph J have not been obtained. Should one board within the Town be allowed to waive a section of war that requires all approval necessary. If you did, this then would go contrary to a different section of town law, specifically th~ zoning law, and I also believe the nature of this proposed operation, this application is such that the requirements of provision J are necessary for a proper consideration of this permit. And therefore paragraph J did not relate. The town process must be input. All jurisdiction boards and agencies council and departments that issue permits within the town must.concur to the Town of Southold to be united. The Building Dept. in its denial of Feb. 10, 1993 said the application does not comply. It said No. The Zoning Board of Appeals in i~s interpretation decision agreed with the Building Dept. It too said No. CAC suggested yet a third No. How many No's do we have to have before we all know what the answer is. As a ~esident of the Town of Southold, I feel this application ~y association to provide both docking facilities on a ROW, if approved would create a wave of applications from all other a~o¢iations that own water front property. Be they ROW'S, CUl ~ Sac's, Dead End Streets, you will be inundated with applic&tions. You will be swamped. GBHOS should be instead on the other hand, protecting and legalizing what exists on this property and elsewhere. Mr. Richard Di Blasi and I who own the~two exiSting structures have applications for non-conforming piers and floats on this particular ROW on file with the Town Trustees. The association has refused to give us a letter allowing us to file and legalize these structures that were built before the association was formed and b~fore the association owned the property. Yet, this association has accepted annual rent both from Mr. Di Blasi, myself and the former owner of-my house. Why haven't they given us a letter? Because they had an ulterior motive. They want a 6 boat pier and float, i also understand the Board has received a letter from a tax payer who feels that Mr. Di Blasi and I should be taken to task for not having permits on our privately owned and maintained piers and floats on the association ROW. Well Richard and Ihave been trying to get these permits from the Town Trustees. As you can see by those applications, the various affidavits,, the pictures and aerial photographs and all the supplementary ~documentation that was Sula~itted with those two applications-dating these two existing piers and floats back to the late 1960's prior to the ownership of this property by GBHOA. I'd also like to point out that both Richard and I have shared our piers and floats with another member of the association, that is we each own one boat. On the other side of the float another member docks his boat. The association wants to build a pier and a 6 boat float on this ROW. They physically want to remove my existing pier and float from their Board of Trustees 13 May 26, 1994 property, which I have paid a lease to the association as did the previous owner. Now they arbitrarily and capriciously want to remove a structure that I bought with the house 6 years ago and paid a premium for. No one in the association contacted me verbally or by a letter saying that this pier and float was not mane and could not be transferred and therefore has to be removed. Should this association remove my personal structure from their property I suffer a tremendous financial hardship, s loss. Not to mention the numerous legal ramifications if such an action on their part was illicit. I'd like to submit a copy of an appraisal report on my property attesting to the fact that my real estate value would suffer at approx. $20 to $25,000 loss. This whole time consuming application that has been winding its way through Town Hall since late 1991 early i992, could all have been avoided. Since there is a more reasonable and feasible alternate way of providing additional docking for boats in Spring Pond. And that would be by building a floating dock. Be it a star dock a "T" an "H" dock or a single tier floating dock. This floating dock would satisfy all the so called requirements~of GBHOA while preserving what presently exists, and would prevent involved legal action at all levels. This alternate proposal would not create, nor generate the current self inflicted hardships and it would solve all the associations practical difficulties. I respectfully request the Town Trustees give this application a long hard serious look the Township at large and future applications. And also when you come to that part that protects the health, safety and Welfare of Town residents, you consider me part of the Town. Thank you very much. TRUSTEE KRU~SKI: Would anyone else like to speak against the I live at 360 Bayview Drive, which is a contiguousto the area in question. I would just like to take minute or two to enhance somewhat of Mr. Sambach Jr.'s co, m~ents. I've been a member of the association for 14 years and presently I'm a resident. The question that I have is a need for additional dock space. I don't see need for additionaI dock Space. We currently have moorings that are not being used. Ten years ago GBHOA built an area from Fox Island for the mooring of boats. They built slips. The original intent for that construction was to. take care of the same questionnaire. To have more docking space for people whowere looking for more docking space. Besides taking care of what was need then the original intent was also to provide for future expansion. My thoughts are instead of going through all of the machinery that is in motion right nqw, to build new dock space would be to look into expanding the area of Fox Island. It would be out of harms way, less obtrusive, a lot less expensive and a lot better for the ecology. Thank you for your time. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone else like to speak against the application? EDB~RD~E: I live in GBHOA and I'm presently president of the association. I don't want to take any more time but I~d Board of Trustees 14 May 26, 1994 just like another show of hands of the members who want these additions. (Hands raise) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Please keep them up. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: How many members are there in the association? 5IR. i SLATZEN: 93. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: 93 Homeowners? M~. MATZEN: There's 100 homeowners, and property owners, only 93 are members. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me make a general comment first. What we have here is a classic situation. I've been on the Board and this is my ninth year and this is unfortunately typical of what happens when people don't agree and they try to get a governmental agency to swing the club for them.. And this is a case where the bottom is privately owned, it's not public bottom. And we don't have a Town Shellfish Resource there at stake, is that correct Peter? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Right, outside there is but not in there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what I mean, it's privately owned. The question when we have a public facility is whether this monopolization by a few people over the whole facility. This is strictly a privately owned area and it's one of those cases where people can't seem to come to an agreement as to how to use the land. And it's association land. I have a ~question for anyone. When did the association purchase that property and why is the 2 gentlemen who spoke against it have their docks on that property. ~!.I~TZEN: They have their docks on their property at our b~hest. We let them stay there. They don't pay a lease, they dOn't pay a rent for this. That was their own decision to do this in 1989 before Mr. Samback owned the house. Fir. Sheeby did it at our own Board meetings. Because people were saying, "How come there are two private docks on association property?" And Sheeby himself at the time, he was passed president and so was his wife. But at the time he wasn't. And he himself said we'll pay on our own volition $50 each'and made Dick Di Blasi do the same that. Dick Di Blasi don't seem to remember that anymore when I told him that. That's a voluntary payment. We don't charge for that. Has it been paid annually since 19897 Yes, 1989. : Originally back in the 1960's you claim they were built then, why were they originally built on that pr. wasn't it association property? wasn't an association until 1974. The orlglna. Bay Club turned it over to us. When all the property was sold they turned it over to us. Gardener's Bay Club were the original owners of the land. In those days, 1978 there was only 28 boats there. If you wanted to put a boat in or dock in ..... Twenty years ago there was 4 docks in this position and had 8 boats. Two of those people are dead now. They don't have those docks now, they rotted out and nobody ever used them. Now suddenly we need the space again. And all we want to do is put back there what was twenty years ago. You let Hoard of Trustees 15 May 26, 1994 people take advantage of us. They take advantage of us. We let them stay in there, now they say "the hell with the association". They're saying, "I got mine, the hell with you". They don't want any other members using that property. And that's not right. That's not fair. And that's why all these people are here tonight. They feel the same way I do. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: For a point of clarification, I still don't understand how those two docks were built on that, the Gardener's Bay Club" .... MR. MATZEN: They were given permission bM the original owners. A tertiary permission. They have nothing in writing. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But this comes under .... it seems likes it's a legal decision whether they in fact have rights of ownership or use of that property over the association. MR. MATzEN: They were built after 1954. The~ Zoning code was in'effect at that time and neither one of those docks have permits and that's why they're trying to Grandfather them in now and we won't allow it. 'Cause if we don't get ours maybe they shouldn't be there either. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, I mean the actual legal rights that they have not permits. The Town wetlands Ordinance wasn't adopted until 1971. ~R. MATZEN: We're a legal corporation. We have a Board of Directors. we have 17 members on the board. 5 are officers and 12 regulars that ~serve 3 years each. All are voluntary. We have right over property. If you read our By-Laws it will tell you we can sell property if we wanted to. We could sell this land to those people. This was tried when Sheeby had that property. He tried to take it over then, andhave docks in perpetuity. We turned it down then and we'll turn it down now. They'_re there at our behest. But we're not gonna make it legal for them, to stay there. Like Mr. Sambach says, "no approval needed f~om the ZBA" This Board gives permits for Town Wetlands, n0bodyelse in this Town has the right to. You do. You don't need the ZBA for permission to do it. The Building Dept. gave approval for the project. But the last administration, Mr. Bredemeyer made me go before the ZBA to seek that interpretation. Which we didn't want to de. A whole year I fought that before we did. Also if he wants to go by what the ZBA has said, that makes his dock illegal. He's not on his own property. He's on our property. And Mr. Di Blasi's dock is illegal too. In the same respect he is telling us we can't have a dock and our dock would be illegal ifwe~built it. It's OK for you but not right for us. That's all I have to say. Does the Board have any questions. MR. Just to co~t,~ent, on my particular dock. I've been a property owner since 1979 and I know, I have pictures of the house from prior to 1967 showing a dock there at that time. Although it sits on the property owned by the GBHOA, and I do not own it, I was approached as Mr. Matzen says in 1989, I don't know exactly when, I was approached by theGBHOA telling me that my dock was on their property, which I was aware of, and to use their property in such a way they wanted me to pay $100 a year additional fee. Which was fine with me, I understood why, ~oard of Trustees 16 May 26, 1994 I didn't know that it wasn't the right number, but I paid the $100 and never questioned it ever since they instituted it. It was not my idea to put a fee on ito It was something they wanted me to pay which they thought was fair. CHARLES LUStiER : I'm a member of the association. I believe that ~u ha~e the authority to let us cross the Wetlands and put this dock in. And I believe that is what this is ail about. I don't understand what everybody in the association is doing washing their laundry here. As part of the Town we really shouldn"t be doing it. The association has made a decision to put the docks in. And that's something that's voted on in the association. We come before you asking to cross the Wetlands to build a floating dock. I really think that's what it comes down to. If we're in violation in Town law by doing this thing you shouldn't allow us to do it. If wetre not violating the Town Law and this is our property, I believe we should go out and do it regardless of what is going on within the association. The association does not want the marine committee to put this dock in. T~ey will not let us do it even if you give us permission. I thi~k %hat's what it really comes down to. TRUSTEE HOLZAPR~L: I have a few questions, just to the two whO have the docks. In either of your deeds is there a .to the docks? I could produce a contract of sale of my house 2'bought the house in 1988 from Al. Sheeby. In the contract of sale as part of my quotients to the house with the dock and float were included. Not in the deed itself. In the deed there is a clause, I don't know the ~ing of it, but in the deed there is a clause. That says that dock is yours/ It says the dock is mine, not the land. I do not own land. I own the structure. HOLZAPHEL: The other dock owner? There's nothing to my knowledge that appears But I too, own the dock. A member of the GBHOA reconstructed it for me and it's always been on the OBHOA property. I know it, they know it, no one has ever questioned it until this matter of a new dock came up and all of a sudden they're throwing up to me and to Mr. Sambach Jr., "What are you doing here"? It was there when I bought the house. I didn't add anything to it. Mr. Sambach Jr., didn't add anything to it, We didn't take more than we had. What we paid for the house included the dock. It was sitting on the association property and the association said, "Hey Mr. Di Blasi give $100 a year". So I write out a check every year. If they ask me f6r more money I might consider that, if they ask for less, fine. I pay exactly what they ask me to pay. ~nd there has never been a question about it until we objected to the construction of the new dock. MR. MATZEN: Again, what he is saying is wrong, it's not $100, it's $50. 'And that was a voluntary payment by you. It's in a board meeting and I can product that docUment. That Mr. Sheeby brought it up at a board meeting and that you and he .Board of Trustees 17 May 26, 1994 would pay that $50. (Too many people talking at one time for me to hear) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does the Board have any other questions for the people involved here? TRUSTEE ~ARRELL: Yes, I do. I'm trying to understand how are involved in the whole association? It's 100 tax payers. Who owns the property on which this proposal was made on which the hearing is being based is that She 100 property owners? ' ~. ~ATZEN: Yes Or the corporation, however you want to look TRUSTEE GARRELL: If you poll all those people in the association ballot, how many are in favor of that, how many are it? I don't know if you have the document there but we the ZBA, we sent letters out to everybody we could meet at a very short notice. A lot of people were on vacation and we couldn't reach them at all. We ended up with 66 for the dock to the ZBA. So your at least 66 out of-1007 Out of 97. I only polled the members. The parties who are speaking against ~oni¢ r are from the association or not? They are from the association and they are that their docks are on. BUt you just said that the land belongs to Then does the land belong to them. 1/100th yes. : We've been going over this as Mr. Matzen has said for a number of years. We've been struggling with this and this issue, is not confined to GBE. This is an issue that's wide spread throughout the Town as far community marina's go. And what rights an association has to put a structure on an association piece of Property. In previous years our Board has constrained because we simply did not have any legal counsel. And when I say none, I mean zero. I would recommend that we take this to .our Town Attorney who is very competent now and will get back to us at a reasonable amount of time. Two weeks, maybe a week with a decision on how to handle this. I don't want to be stepping over the zoning code if that's not appropriate legally and put the TOwn in jeopardy. Yet, if we have %he authority to grant a permit without~ any kind of jurisdiction of the zoning code then this Board certainly has a responsibility to do that. That's my position on that, I don't know how the rest of the Board feels about that. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: The one question I have. The question I have is can we condemn somebodies personal property? That's a problem I have. Somebody has a dock, and they own that, can I condemn that and take it away from that person? MR.kMATZEN:. Part of the dock is his dock, we're allowing his doc on our dock. He says it's a 6 man dock, it's a 4 man dock. We' re adding his and making it 6. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: But there are 2 docks there present. ~ ~Board of Trustees 18 May 26, 1994 ~ MATZEN: One by Di Blasi, and one single one by... TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: And you're gonna take one of those docks away? MATZE~: We're gonna take Mr. Sambach's, rip his catwalk out, which he cannot rebuild now, and make it conforming, according to DEC permission on that plan. We want to add his dock and give him full rights on that dock for the rest of his life. He don't go along with that. He wants that dock in his deed. He has said this and we have Lonnie Sambach's letter on it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I don't think this Board has a personal stake either way whether Mr, Sambach has rights to his dock, or the association has. It's just a matter of doing it legally in town Town isn't liable for a law suit. We have a right to take his dock and add it to an as on do.ck. We have that right. TRUSTEE KI{UPSKI: Mr. Matzen & Mr. Sambach can you be if our attorney has any questions for you. Yes. (Both have answered) I just wanted to say it's not like it's 66 against back here are not Mr. Sambach not Di Blasi. We think this is poorly ....... We do have a Board of Directors who are elected. Duly elected appropriately eleCted. We think they have been victims of bad judgement in this plan. No more, no less. We think it's a bad idea. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: FOr What reason, because that property shouldn't be... The site is at a narrow end of the Pond. My lives across the way and I'm not a great driver making U-turns and putting my boat along side the bulkhead. I feel sticking out there would be more difficult. I think an alternate l~Cation of Fox Island is wider, is closer to the entrance a~d more logical place for increasing the volume of boating in the Pond. : Thank you. The largest ROW is this piece of property. It's water. We have a a 10' ROW to Fox Island. You can look in the houses on both sides. These two People are up on a hill on both sides of this property. You can't look into their houses. They're a good distance. They don't want us using that road. They want other members using that property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Again, a concern of this Board isn't ..... we realize that adjacent property owners are traditionally have problems with activities next to them. So this is not really an environmental consideration. We realize it's more of a so~iQlogical thing. ~RS~ i~A~ZEN:' In the beginning when we first filed claim I was secretar~ to the organization, we were not going to move Mr. Sambach's dock. We wanted to leave his dock Ithere and put in another dock. But the DEC came down and told us to remove that non-conforming dock, that we didn't need it, put out one catwalk and incorporate this floating dock on our catwalk. I don't think the Board has any intention of taking Mr. Di Blasi's Board of Trustees 19 May 26, 1994 dock out. We weren't going to take out Mr. Sambach's. It was the DEC' s decision. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Are there any other co~L~ents? The only other thing was, what Mr. Hayes was saying is the hazard's of navigation. It's a very narrow spot. It is down, or fairly near the narrowest spot. The narrowest spot is past these docks. It's at Mr. Di Blasi's dock, where he is. It's 90 feet across. At the other end of this property where we're talking about is 300' across. There's p~entY of room for these docks. Without affecting any other I know this letter is in the folder, it's from Environmental Conservation. The proposal was originally was to move my non-conforming dock which as an architect I know you can't do. And to install a 4 boat pier and float. And I'd like to submit a copy of that letter from the DEC. I_t's suggested (See DEC letter dated 8/7/92) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Unless the Board members have further co~m,,ent I~ll take a motion to suspend (recess) the Public Hearing. TRUSTEE GARRELL: I'll move to recess the Public Hearing. HOL~APHEL: Second. ALL AYES Before you second the motion could this be on of the lawyers reco~,endation whether we get the permit or not. So there's no need for another Public Hearing? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No, we'll definitely have another Public next month. You still have to have another hearing? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Certainly. And we just can't vote on the lawyers advise, we'll take her suggestions. But we need legal 'cause this is strictly an environmental matter. ~: What has the Board been doing with the legal TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: What have we been doing with it? In the past? '~ LUSCHER: Yes. KRUPSKI: It just didn't seem to be. available to the Board of Trustees in the past. I~R. GARRELL: This is the first Board that's had legal or our own attorney's advise on a regular basis and easily accessible. Why would you have to have another P,~hlic TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just to keep the record open. Tonight there was a great deal of new information and in case there's any more information in it. It's our policy, generally, to keep the pubIic notice open. It's more of an inconvenience to us, ~R. ~.'~ Can't anything be done? Everything has been said now. I think you've heard everything now. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: It can' t be, because .... MR. C~AR~ES LUSC~: I've been coming here, I guess you recognize my face, and the only reason you didn't make a decision last month, was because this wasn't...somehow it missed the newspapers. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's right, but we couldn't make a decision without a Public Hearing. .Board of Trustees 20 May 26, 1994 ~R. LUSCHER: But what I'm saying is we would have had the ~ubliC Hearing last month except it wasn't published. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's right, it was a clerical error. HR. LUSCHER: I was just wondering, 'cause I'm sitting here last month expecting a decision. We understood you would make the decision already ...... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No we couldn't make a decision without a Public Hearing. MR. LUSCHER: We came down here, and there was a technicality to hear the decision that it was gonna be a Public Hearing. That's the way I understood it. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We apologize for the clerical error in not PUblishing it for last month. GEORGE CLARK: I too am a director of the association and I've opposed the docks. I just want to say in the defense of these gentlemen Mr. Sambach and Di Blasi, I think they a~e being painted as bad guys. They're not the bad guys. As Mr. Sambach has told you they always permitted someone from the association to share their docks. They haven't been selfish about it. I can't blame Mr. Sambach. Here he has his dock and he's paid for legally and now the association wants to come along and add to it and make it a public dOCk. I think any of us would object to that. And what do we do it on? We do it on legal grounds. I think he has the law on his side. You've had the interpretation of the Zoning Board and it says you have to have a residence single family on a property in order to get a dock. You're aware of that, I'm sure. So it sounds illegal. If we can't do this legal lets not do it at all. I~ we can do it legal, fine. TRUSTEE GARRELL: I think that you've hit the nail on the head when you used the word legal. That's what you have to understand when we reach for a Town Attorney's advise, We want it to be legal too. In matters Which people come t° us that are relatively straight forward~ or their in community agreement, its not hard to go through the public hearing process. In matters like .this where obviously you always have on Long Island and so many places in the east, we have our antennae's up because everybody is thinking about the law suits and adjudication and ..... Its the last thing that the Town wants to be involved in is a law suit that it feels very uncomfortable about. So we as a Board are up here to try to work things through in a legal, fashion. And the legalities just take longer. It's a pity that these things can't be Worked out in groups and associations and worked out by consensus so the whole legal threat c~n be avoided. The legal process always works slowly. Attorney's work slowly. The gentleman used the legal word at least three times in that last statement and that's what we're all about and that's why we have to go through another month of it. So you just have to be patient. 8:52 p.m. - In the matter of RICHARD FRERKING to construct a 4' X 50' catwalk, a 4' X 12' ramp and a 6' X 12' floating dock in a "T"' configuration. Located 680 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck. SCTM %115-12-9 · ~oard of Trustees 21 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE GARRELL: That was the modified application and I have no problem with it. With the float perpendicular to the dock, and it looked better with a short ramp and I felt as long as it kept to the specifications as per the CAC that it ....... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: "CAC recommends approval with the stipulation the catwalk be 3' wide and elevated 4' above high tide mark. And you addressed the length concerns? TRUSTEE G~ARELL: Yes. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do we have any further comment on that? Would a~yone here like to speak against this application? Any more comment on that Board? Motion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: My only co~m,ent is that they agree with the CAC's recommendation. And I'll second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: OK. Marty you want to make a motion on that? TRUSTEE GARRELL: I recommend approval with the stipulation that the catwalk be 3' wide and elevated 4' above the high tide mark. I also recommend that the length of the project as stated must fill the need and not extend beyond what's shown on the application. So the application limits should stand as their stated in the final and amended application. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So when was these amended then? TRUSTEE GARRELL: The original was 20 & not 12. Do you know Sir, when this was amended? I was originally worried about the distance from the vegetation and the beach grass out to the float, and it looked like there was as problem in the extension. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It looks like they're about 20' out from the vegetation. TRUSTEE GARRELL: I hate to quibble ~hout 6' but I thought when I looked at it again, because it had come back again that it had been pulled back with 12' from the vegetation to the pier that anchors that float. My feeling is that it is a a narrow channel and I feel that the 12' ramp as shown should be modified. I'd like to see that 12' ramp reduced~ to about 4'. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You already have a 6' drop here. TRUSTEE HOLZAPREL: That would be straight back. You'd have to pull the dock back. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Shorten the catwalk by 4' maybe. Would that ible? If I shorten the catwalk by 4' that would place last in the grass. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It would effectively the whole end of the dock in 4' TRUSTEE SARRELL: The real difficulty you have is you want to reach the 3 to 4' water and that puts you quite far out into that channel. It's certainly out beyond what your neighbors have isn' it? I included a photograph of the neighbors property and I don't believe I would extend out beyond that. TRUSTEE GARRELL: What about your neighbor on the other side doesn't have a floating dock. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Yes, he comes out in that little cut. He comes out right'from the land there. ~ ~oard of Trustees 22 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: What Bruce said just said is the CAC said that they have no problem and that it shouldn't extend any further. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But what's further? Did you visit this one Bruce? M~, LOUCKA: No. T~USTEE KRUPSKI From what it shows here and by the pictures it shows ..... TRUSTEE GARRELL: That's a wide angle lens. tt looks like that creek is 120' wide. TRUSTEE KRUPSKt: But it shows the one post and the ramp and float, which is basically this...the one post, ramp and float. And this float is a "T" instead of straight out. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Oh, OK. When I first saw it I misunderstood it, I though you were pushing that float out in the same dock line, but I see you've got the "T" configuration. I'll make the motion. TRUSTEE Kt{UPSKI: Did we close the hearing yet? CLERK: Yes you did. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Let me repeat the motion. I move to construct the catwalk, ramp and floating dock in a "T" configuration with the stipulation that the catwalk width be reduced to 3' and 4' above elevation. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: S.~bject to possible shortening if navigation becomes a problem. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 9:00 p.m. - In the m~tter of RICHARD BURDEN to replace (within 18") 107 1.f. of existing timber bulkhead and add 15' return on west side and 20' return on east side. New bulkhead will be 18" higher than existing. Dredge up to 10' in front to maximum depth of 3' below MLW. Approx. 50 c.y. of spoil will be placed behind bulkhead as backfill. Also to construct a 20' X 40' swimming pool and decks landward of bulkhead as show on site plan of Van Tuyl. Additional 75 +/- c.y. of sand will be trucked in from upland source. Located 2800 Ole Jute Lane, Mattituck. SCTM $122-4-15, & 16. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Do~s anyone want to speak in favor of this I'm not looking really to do anything crazy. There s a real problem that I have is that in recent years, water keeps coming over the bulkhead and at the bulkhead my property tends to slope off. So I only want to raise it the 18" ~so that I'm at the same height as my neighbors property basically running across. Also I have a problem in a sense that when the Town gets flooded with these high tides, the water actually runs off at one side of my property and comes off and runs right down the driveway, I don't know if you say that, and fills up the street to a point where the house across the street was raised 6 cinder blocks because the water was floating right through his living room. The Town pumps out the property every time right across my yard and all the sediment k~eps filling where I used to have, there's a picture hanging ~n Mattituck airport, was a 55 foot boat in back of my house. Now you Board of Trustees 23 May 26, 1994 couldn't even get through there with a pedal boat. Because the Town keeps .... and it's at the end ..... I'm only looking to restore what was originally there in the last couple of years. I've spoken to the Town, and they told me that after the winter they were going to get into something that they would drain the street if it ever filled up again into the Bay with a catch basin for the sediment. I gave them...I told them they could the free right of my property on that south side to use whatever they needed to benefit all the people within that community. In the meantime I bought a house that I could use a boat and I can't even get it in. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Marty, you inspected this? TRUSTEE GARRELL: The problem I saw with it, is where is your flushing gonna be for your swiim~ing pool? How are you gonna handle the pool filters and everything else? Where were you gonna site those? TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: The backwash. M~ BURDEN: I'm really not familiar with how a pool works, but I was going to put it more towards the side of the house up on the side. How many feet does that wash have to be from the water? TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: There is no legal distance. Your not supposed to do anything within 75'. That's why your here~ TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: It's allowed, it's just s~mething that we I have plenty of room on the side of the garage to on the side of the house. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Dr~well? TRUSTE~ HOLZAPHEL: It says dr~well, I would think that's where I would put it. Because to put it in the backyard. TRUSTEE GARRELL: That's a dredged canal right. It's sort of L backwater, hasn't it? Well it was dredged 25 years ago, the way I it, 25 to 30 years ago by Jules Z~broski, and that island or that peninsula that there is the residue of that. What amazes me is back in 1975 even later, a man had a 55' boat and supposedly his engine is in the sand there. It fell out of the bottom of the boat and towed the boat away and left the engine in the sand. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We have something from the CAC, but it looks like it was cut off. It's from 11/26/ to 1t/29 so I think we don't have .... We definitely them. It seems like you started a~ we don't have the next page. It says, "provided the applicant provide a 10' buffer of natural vegetation and the pool moved to the southeast side yard". Oh I thought it went on from there. You recommended approval approval of the dredging. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: There's already a bulkheading there, right? TRUSTEE TRUSTEE: yes. MR. LOUCKA: "Recommend approval provided applicant allow a 10' buffer and pool should be moved southeast side. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: It's behind the bulkhead and everything has been done. Board of Trustees 24 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well the existing grade here, that's the problem, it should be graded to that so the CAC ...... the CAC's comments are appropriate her. The pool is very close to the creek and we really hesitate to locate a pool that close. Would you have a problem to relocating it to the side yard? ~.. BURDF~: Yes. YOu see this house, you see the line right there by the house. They overhang and the house is on someone else's property. When this property was granted they gave Mr. Tuthill who at the time was Vice-President of a bank, permission to put this house up. At the time he built this house and if you look at the Town records, there's no set backs, they said "just put a house up". He didn't own this property, this was owned by a man in Queens. When.we approached the Building Dept. the man that's not there any more, we said to him, how Could you let a ~y build a house within 3 feet of a property line. He said we knew he was gonna buy it. He never bought it for a year and a half later. My father, who built all over the world, said to me, I never seen a property approved without setbacks. This propert~ technically is a separate building plot. It's a separate lot. When I went to Cron & Cron in Town, they told me that in situations like this they give a ten foot leeway either side. Like a no man's property and then this property can be built on. I don't want to loose this property then if my kid's get older or in the future I can someday build a house. And in essence this property is bigger than the one that the house is on and if I put a pool on it, first of all I don't think I'm allowed by the Town because I have to have a residential structure. I just can't put a pool on an empty lot. I thought that was a rule in the Town. Also the problem was the layout of the house is that everyone will be coming into a horrible section of the house over here and I don't need that kind traffic. The people down the street have a pool just like this behind a bulkhead and I researched it pretty good in the sense that as long as I was behind a bulkhead ..... the contour of the property ..... that's one of the reasons that I'm building the retaining wall right here is that I want to keep the pool, in fa is almost an ~hove ground pool. That's what we were wondering, is it gonna be an pool? Well it's not an above ground pool but the contour coming house ..... in other words when you walk out of the level of the house the pool ...... I'm building this land up tremendously and putting terracing and grass, plants and everything. So this area here is just what it is now only 18" higher. So that this is all up in the air. In other words I'm bringing fill in at the side walls of the pool and in no way affect that water. The water would have to raise 5' at that point, 7' the whole neighborhood would be gone. TRUSTEE GARRELL: With the drainage, and the contours, frankly if that were anything other than a .... if that were not a dead. water canal, if that were & creek with shellfish or something very sensitive I would really feel strongly about not having not putting a pool right there. On the other hand, you do have .... the reality is you've got a dredge canal. You've got Board of Trustees 25 May 26, 1994 the bulkhead. It makes it a different game. L sure wish you could put the pool in there though. ~R.~BURDEN: If I put it there I could never build there. It so happens that I bought a lot that I paid a lot of money for that I put a swimming pool. I don't understand the drainage problem. You mean the flow of the water off the land into the wetland. You don't want that? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No. We tried to minimize that. ~.!BURDEN: No, it's gonna be tremendously less now. That's one of my biggest problems is that I'm literally .... it really falls down there. If you see all my neighbors properties, they could have brought in for all I know. I just came before you ..... TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We try to minimize this on every property we look at. ~. BURDEN: I think I'm gonna have less runoff now with this t~an'I have now. I have tremendous runoff. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We will try to minimize that even more. The CAC's always recommends and what we usually reco~L~end is a nOn'turf area next to the bulkhead. You put in either gravel or ornamental plantings. MR.~, BURDEN: That was a big ploy for me because for me to mow back there was gonna become a problem. This was a real touchy thing, so to put that kind of obsorbtion type of premise there, I have no problem. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I~still have a problem with the dredging now because it's not being done on...or is it being done on your property. Does your property extend halfway into the dredged canal? ~R. My property goes over to the island across the Lane is not Channel Lane. That property was owned by Mr. Zabr~wski and it appears that in 1979 they condemned ~at proper~y and they wanted to make a boat 'ramp through there and the Town took the property away and three years later they gave it back to Mr.~Zabrowski because they didn't want to put a boat ramp or there was co£m~fdnity opposition~ t thought it was one of those checks on a Hagstrom map so nobody reprints a map, but they did name it Channel Lane. ThiS property is 50' wide and it reaches out and now is part of a property that's a couple of acres, 3 or 4 acres, was bought by the man dOWn the street and basically what happens is, my property runs out over there, I own..~, if you look, some people don't own anything behind their bulkhead. When they bought this they own right'up t~ their bulkhead, so they don't even own the land where their boat's being kept. My property definitely runs all the way out, and on one section actually runs to the part of the island all the way over to here. (indicating on map) I do own behind my bulkhead, I definitely own pretty well out into the ........ We want to get this whole thing dredged, the problem is that one guy over here is not bulkheadedo His foundation is now exposed because so much of his property has fallen in. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: To be honest with y6u, my experience of the Board we're opening up a can of worms to allow dredging. If you're gonna open up the whole creek to be dredged. Board of Trustees 26 May 26, 1994 MR. BURDEN: Right now, I don't have water front property. At One of the problems is the Town placed half the sediment in that creek when they keep pumping out the street. So I'm only asking to restore so 'I can get a boat in and out. At high tide I sometimes can get out. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Traditionally, we have only allowed this sort of dredging if you could document ...... TRUSTEE GARRELL:' How are you gonna get out through the rest of the canal if your neighbors haven't dredged in there? ~ . BURDEN: Two things. One, at high tide yon can get out. o, ~ think this is gonna set a precedent because I'm dealing with a lot of older people. Some new people, who are really scared to go and do all this paper work. I paid a rather large fee to En-Consultants to do the paper work. It's amazing what you have to go through to get this. But I sat down with the people, and their gonna come through as a co~t~ttee rather than individuals. Basically the attitude was, '~you go get yours done" .... TRUSTEE GARRELL: I just don't see right now how if you dredge 50' and everybody else is stuck .... Well I'm the worst, because I'm at the end. GARRELL: How are you gonna get in and out of there easi they come in with their dredging application? MR. I'm the worst, next to me is not too bad, and isn't too bad. There's only one guy who's bad, he has no bulkheading and we just hug this wall when we go out° TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think in order to do this, something on this~ it's ~t so much on your property, but it's gonna impact on the whole creek. And like each other's property is gonna come in° We'd like to see, before we approve dredging, we'd like to see soundings in front of your property, going across the creek and then a few going across it. Also soundings going out here (indiCating on map). TRUSTEE ~OLZAP~EL: The problem is they don~t want to do is you don't want to create a hole where the water sits there all day and night because the tides go up and down but the water just Stays there, there's no movement because its in a hole and that can get nasty, in terms of the general life. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI-: If everyone is gonna do this we want to considerthis as a whole project and the Board obviously is not saying they're dead set against it, but we have to consider the So in other words if my neighbors never dredge this will slOWly fill in and than I will not be a water front property. Then this will slowly vegetate, fill in and as the Town keeps pumping or Whatever sediment comes in here, this will eventually become a landlock property. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We're not saying you can't do it, this is standard as far as ...... M~. BURDEN: OK let me ask you a question, 'cause this is a big ~ing for the kids. Can we do the pool and the dredging later? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Sure, 'cause the pool is your property ~nd hopefully we're gonna make it so it's not gonna impact the To_wn waters at all. ~oard of Trustees 27 May 26, 1994 So your saying, unless I go to the rest of the [e, maybe, and get them all t~ agree ..... KRUPSKI: Not necessarily, if you just give us soundings t~o the dredge canal coming out and that will give us the information we need to know as far as how much water there is. ~i~ BURDEN: In the middle is fine, but towards the wall it gets ~. Like the house next door, I see sand at his at low tide, but I don;t. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Just give us the soundings along the bulkhead, and in the middle so that we know. If we don't have the seundings on the map in the file we can't prove that what we did was a tremendous mistake. ~STEE GARR~.~L: You just sat through what happens with neighbors, I mean that was an extreme case because of the large g~0~p of prop~r~y. ~US~EE KRUPSKI: 'Extreme case, but not unusual. TRUSTEE G~: We have people who live on property Where somebOdy wants to do things with a marina across the way, or somebody wants to do things on the adjacent property and s.uddenly down ~he line comes legal action and law suits and that's ..... but you'll have another generation of property owners. ~!.BURDEN: Well ~et me .tell you the problem with next door ~S~' so you can go further with it. The guy next door bought the house for $204,000 and immediately put it up for $240,000, he'll never sell it. He can't get rid of it. So now he just rents. He's not gonna put a dime into dredging his back yard. Two doors down their ready to go to North Carolina. Next oor down from that, now that guy is interested into dredging. ome that do, some that don't. So I'm condemned 'Cause I'm at the end: In essence my deed, so you know, says that I have a ROW on that creek, just like a street. I am allowed an access in and 'out. What we,re really creating is a situation where I'm gonna be forced to sue my neighbors for my right of way because they' re blocking my road. It would be like me throwing cinder blOcks in the middle of the street and not allowing the guy down the street to go past my house. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That's what we're worried about. If you can show us on a survey that you have the proper water that is you d~edge out a small area for a boat and you can get into deeper water in the middle of the channel and get out. That's what we need, we need that proof in the file. It's not you or your nei( ~R~,. Could you make an exception into the part if I- get a'~ietter the Town saying that they threw a lot of sand in during the last few storms. It was a lot' better before,- until the Town threw a lot of sand there. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That will help the record, but that will be just part of it. MR'~ L~UCKA: When you talk about the hole, he's only gonna go t'-below MLW and it's deeper further away .... MR. BURDEN: If I was to dock my boat in the middle I could water ski down the middle. MR. LOUCKA: We didn't have any problem with that. It's not a lOt of dredging. Board of Trustees 28 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: How many yards? Oh 50 yards. ~ow would you do it, with a backkhoe? MRI BURDEN: I keep digging this .... I can see a problem you gentlemen think. I'm going to be collecting all the sediment from the neighbors. I really feel that especially with the last purchase with the house down the street, I really see that, it wouldn't be next year, but it would be probably a long time, by the time all the paper work is done, I really see that whole area ...... we'd like to get that whole area restored to what it was. We're only looking to take 18' boats out, not sail boats with 4' keels. Basic light recreational boating. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I still would like to see the soundings. Is there anything else that we'd like to discuss before we close~ the Public hearing? TRUSTEE GARRELL: I move to close the hearing. TRUSTEE ALBEETSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Somebody can make a motion. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I~ll make a motion that we grant a permit to replace 107 1.f. of existing timber bulkhead and add a 15' return on west side and 20' return on east side. New bulkhead will be 18" higher than existing. Construct a 20' X 40' swimming pool and decks landward as shown on site plan by Van Tuyl. Additional 75+/- c.y. of sand will be trucked in from upland source. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second. TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: I just wanted to add a vegetative buffer. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: A non-turfed area below the proposed the 6' contour. Seaward of the swimming pool. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So you have to reapply for the dredging but we need .... we're gonna require on that soundings. MR,. BURDEN: Do I have to reappl¥ for the whole process again or resubmit the same thing with the soundings on it? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: No you have to completely reapply. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved for a brief recess, TRUSTEE WENCZEL seconded - In the matter of J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of' to construct a swimming pool, terrace, backwash, sanitary system as per Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services permit. To truck in appro~. 200 c.y. of clean fill for regrading and the installation of stone parking areas on what is now a dirt parking area approx. 40' from existing tidal wetlands line. Reconstruct existing catch basin if necessary. A row of staked hay bales will be kept in place. All as per plans dated 12/14/93. Located East End Road, Fishers Island. SCTM 93-2-2. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Does anyone else have a comment on this appliCation? GLENN JUST: I just want to let the Board know that in this par'ticular project in all sincerity (tape did not play well at this point) ..... except for the driveway which was 40' away from the wetlands and pre- existed, that was the only part of the project we were kind of forced into getting within the Trustees' Board of Trustees 29 May 26, 1994 jurisdiction, but the rest of it I think speaks for itself, we tried to work, again, away from it. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I don't have any problem with the project, but just as a matter of record, isn't the corner of the house within our jurisdiction? (Mr. Just indicated ) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone else like to speak in favor or against this application? Any other comment? TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move to close the hearing. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Motion to approve? TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move to approve. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES 9:43 p.m. In the matter of JOHN STRIPP to construct a single family swelling, sanitary system, pool as per plan dated August 27, 1993. A staked row of hay bales will be maintained during construction. Applicant has DEC and SCDH approvals. Located PriVate Road, Fishers Island. SCTM #7-2-9. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone here like to comment on this ~pp!icati0n? ~ JUST~i Once again, this project dates almost 5 years now and we originally gotten a letter from the Board, I guess they said it was out of their jurisdiction, which at the time I applied to the Health Dept. I don't know how good the coordination was done at that time, but the long form environmental assessment was done part 1 by myself as the responsibility to see that the applicant could do it. The Health Dept. did a Part 2 and I did an addendum and a second addendum to Part 2. There has been an awful lot of information back and forth for public recordwhich is surprising. All in concern for the Barlow Pond watershed. I don't know if the Trustees had a chance to look over the new final report. I have a copy with me here. In this area of Fishers Island where Searle,' Stripp and Tor Tor property which you released months ago were all out of the water shed area. The water doesn't drain from the north or south part of the Pond. And I think that was a the main concern, why it was basically put on hold for quite some time so this report could be finalized, which was done with the SCHD on water shed area. There are public wells on the Island now that are being utilized, but the report does say that Barlow Pond should be protected as much as possible just ia case a severe, I shouldn't say drought, but salt water intrusion made into the wells or a breakdown of the wells that Barlow Pond water supply is still on hold. The buildings there and the pump is there and the purification plan is there but is not being used but is held on reserve in case of emergencies. Again, I think that was both the both the publics Trustees, and the DEC's concern at that time. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: t do have one concern that was brought up by the Fishers Island Association about the archeological remains. What can you tell us about that? .MR. JUST: I don't know if the Board is really scoring on the process. On all the applications from all agencies no one asked us about archeological concerns. Except when you get to the Board of Trustees 30 May 26, 1994 Part 1 of the full environmental assessment forms. Two questions that refer only to is the site near or adjacent to a site that registered as a natural historical site. Both answers were negative. The Part 2 though which the SCHD does go into detail as far as archeological concerns. What they do is have a big map of certain areas and Fishers Island is about 3 feet long, its an inch to a 200 scale and has circles and squares. Circles mean an archeelogical find and what they do is in that square is they rotate it around that circle because areas of archeological concern are not identified to the public because the public can go in and rip off arrow heads or whatever artifacts are there. When one does submit an application the DEC has these maps, and the SCHD has these maps and they look into it and make sure the project won't affect these concerns or not an area that is identified as a known site of archeological concern, tn this case the SCHD & DEC duplicate that and confer the office of Office of Historical Parks and~ Preservations in Albany which has detailed information on archeological concerns and they as well have found it negative. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Well isn't there a shell heap someplace close there? MR. 'JUST: As far as all these maps are concerned the DEC had ..... and I personally have taken a look at through the Freedom of Information Act and the Office of Parks and Recreation in Albany and SCHD say no. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: See the shell heap was referred to in the document in the file. It refers to the sunken forest area. The sunken forest is more towards the Searle property in b~ck there, that's the sunken forest. Again, they're vague, intentionally vague. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: I'm aware of that. Unfortunately, it's something we really can't control.. We have to rely on the expertise of the DEC or whoever is reviewing these archeological maps. I knowMr. Thatcher's letter brings up the mention of archeological concerns. I've replied to the ZBA which has this project under review that we have done everything possible to dig up, no pun intended, of these archeologicaI findings, and to come hack negative, every chance. Somebody could say it's there, but we can't say it's there unless it's a registered site. We've offered, there is something in front of the ZBA now, and Mr. Steve Ham the attorney for Mr. Stripphas offered to allow the Conservancy in Dr. John .... he's a big archeologist on the Island, to access the site at his own expense to look for artifacts. They have not come back to us saying, "yes we'll do it". But the door is open and it's in writing in front of the ZBA saying, "if you want to do it at your own expense, do it sudden". TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Why are you before the ZBA? MR. J~ST: Because it's a corner lot and the siting of the house we have a variance, a front yard setback on two sides and again it's a corner lot. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You see how they're constrained here. MR. JUST: What we did because of the presence of wetlands and triangular shaped lot we kept moving everything back to a point ~oard of Trustees 31 May 26, 1994 of this triangle which put us into a ZBA matter in trying to get away from the-wetlands. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: We appreciate the fact that the house has been squeezed against the road. They're right up against the property line. ~R. JUST: FIDCO wasn't too happy with that what we done in front of them as well. They no real power of denial. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think FI~CO could have been more responsive on these three properties. I think they should have swapped them and left that whole area natural. MR. JUST: The reflect that make an offer and Searle and Stripp property to swap with this with $1,800 on Fishers Island owned by FIDCO and we went to very, very great lengths to swap these two lots. They made offers and at the last possible second they were turned down. I was paid to go out and look at other sites on the Island for presence of wetlands and other environmental concerns and we were that close from having these two lots swapped. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I guess it's more politics than anything. MR.,~JUST: Again, the Barlow Pond members had a lot do with it. Bariow Pond hasn't been used for two years. The level of the Pond is so high right now, since the water's going in it isn't even drained off at water level, we have suqar maples that are 18" to 20" around that are dead, that have ~allen into the lake because their feet are wet entirely. Normally ~hat's a wet fOrest type and occasionally gets wet once or twice a year. The level of water is actually killing the trees around the Pond. It's not being drained off. I think that was everyone's main concern with Barlow Pond. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Definitely. But I still that 'whole wetland connects down to the, I don't know what body of water, ocean it think. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Let me backtrack on, you say that the septic system failure would be no problem because of the way the dr~ ainage was. MR~i~.JUST: This particular one we set up that we met all the maximum setbacks for the SCHD, Trustees and DEC. It's the way we finally laid out that the sand filled system was a little bit below the level of the road so the drainage would be reverse drainage away from Barlow Pond back towards the location of the house. And the sw~mL~ingpeol activities? The swiLmuingpool, again we moved the backwash and filter system, I'd have to look it up and see exactly how far away we are away. It Could be 110, maybe 115, maybe it's even 200 feet away. That was the main concern of'the Health Dept. We all know there's a lot of algicide that is used in swh~u,ing pools and they have the same effect on the wetlands as they do on the swimming pool. That's the reason forbacking up so far away as we did. The Health Dept. also asked up to place the home heating oil storage tank in a sealed basement which is something new. A lot of of older homes have oil tanks on the outside. They leak or rust and there's seepage in this particular case would be concealed in basements. Hoard of Trustees 32 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE GARRELL: There's no way you could make this application without a swimming pool? MR. JUST: I don't think that's my choice, to be honest with you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: You have the activity there and it's kind of a complete package. MR. JUST: I think there's only one public pool on the island, that's the only one I know of. It's surrounded by salt water for salt water swimming. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move to close the hearing. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Let me read the special conditions firstJ We have a copy of the DEC report here. There are 14 conditions. (See conditions in report) Would the Trustee's like to add anything to those conditions? I'd move for an approval on this application with a condition that the applicant follows the conditions set forth in the DEC Permit. Do you think it necessary that we mirror regulation ~ 14 in relation to our Town Wetland Code? Or do you think it satisfactory that the DEC has that in their deed relating to the DEC Wetland Code? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Conditions seem adequate and I don't know what we could add. MR. JUST: The only think that comes to my mind is the 25 foot difference in jurisdiction. Whereas the Trustees set 75'. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Second ALL AYES 10:02 p.m. - In the matter of ROB~ERT E. PATTERSON to' construct guest rooms, terrace, walk, deck platforms and to install additional dry, ells in existing sanitary system. All construction activity shall take place on what is now lawn area. All construction shall take place a minimum of 55' from freshwater wetlands. A continuous line of staked haybales shall be installed prior to and maintained during all phases of construction activities an an area of "no disturbance" shall be maintained. All activity as per enclosed plans as prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King last dated February 16, 1994. NOTE: This project was approved in 1990, but has expired. Located Crescent Ave., Fishers Island. SCTM ~6-i-10 (Recessed from April meeting) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to speak in favor of this application? I'd just like to note that the Trustees should note s almost all laurel right down to the edge of the small kettle hole. And if haybales have to be put in place we're gonna be establishing a buffer area between the wetlands and the developed area that never existed before. Where as now there is not buffer area. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Barring no further comment, can I have amotion to close the hearing? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: So moved. TRUSTEE HOLZAP~EL: Second. ALL AYES 10:05 p.m. - In the matter of JOHN FIORE to construct a 16' X 32' inground pool, wood decking and fence around pool. Also to construct a 14' X 32' and a 6' X 24' floating dock with 2 Board of Trustees 33 May 26, 1994 1/2" galvanized pipes attached parallel to existing bulkhead. Located Sunset Way, Southold SCTM ~91-5-5. (NOTE: Applicant has amended application to construct just the pool, deck & fence around pool). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: So they've deleted the dock configuration from that then? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Yes. If you look at the plar~ you'll see that it's extremely close to the bulkhead. There's a boat launching ramp there that was placed there illegally and now we're gonna have pool blocking access to it, so it's like crazy. There's nothing on the plans for a backwash or drywell. I think as we look at the file they did apply for a variance to move the pool away from the bulkhead and apparently they were denied. TRUSTRR KRUPSKI: By whom? TRUSTEE WENCZEL: ZBA. I have reservations about the whole project, but I don't know quite what you want to do with it. This is the old plan. The DEC granted them a permit for a small pool. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Didn't we grant a permit for this? They have a permit here signed by Bill and I for a 16' X 40' inground pool. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Yes, but DEC denied them that, and made them move the pool and made them make it smaller. And now it's jammed in right at their launching ramp. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: CAC reco~mL~ends approval provided the applicant remove the concrete ramp and regrade existing shoreline away from the creek. Provide a sand drain to allow water to percolate into the ground. It's the only idea if that's the only place the ZBA and the DEC will allow it. See they already have a permit for the dock, they don't have to reapply. Can someone close the hearing. TRUSTEE GARRELL: Move the hearing to be closed. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Someone want to make a motion? I'll make a motion that we recommend approval based on he ZBA, DEC & CAC recommendations that the pool be located as per their final amended Plans and that in the.process of excavating for the pool the concrete ramp shall be removed and intertidal marsh be planted in its location. TRUSTEE WENCZEL: Do we want them to build a bulkhead there? They're gonna have to bulkhead across there because there's not gonna be anything to hold the pool up. At the base of that bulkhead there is marsh. There is grass growing at the base of the~ bulkhead at the waters edge. TRUSTEE GARRELL: This looks like a clear cut case of 'shoe horning' one thing after another after another for a little piece of property. I just can't believe .... I can't see a pool here. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Again, this is like the one in Mattituck. I still have the motion on the floor, and I would suggest the retaining wall to go landward at. the top of the ramp and the concrete ramp be broken up and removed so that tidal wetland vegetation can grown in that area. Board of Trustees 34 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL: Second. ALL AYES 10:15 p.m. - In the matter of DOMINICK SEGRETE to construct a 3' X 28' deck wrapped around to a 4' X 9' deck, a 3' X 8' ramp to a 6' X 20' float attached to existing bulkhead. As per drawing. Located 4270 Wunneweta Road, Cutchogue. SCTM %111-I4-22. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Would anyone like to speak or in favor of this application? It's little pie shaped piece of property. It's not 15' from the property line but the lot next to it is large and I don't think it's a problem, and they already have docking facilities a good distance away. So it's not gonna affect that. I don't see a problem with that. I'll make a motion that we close the hearing. Do I have a second on that? TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve this project. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE ALRERTSON moved to go off the Public Hearing, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES VI. RESOLUTIONS: 2. Eh-Consultants Inc., on behalf of JOAN HALLIGAN, as per Permit $4291 to construct a 3' X 40' fixed wood catwalk, (4' min. elev. above grade supporting spartina altenrniflora) and 3' X 4' wide wood steps will be located at seaward end of catwalk as per revised map dated March 14, 1994. Applicant s~mitted a doctor's note stating that & physical ailment requires a 4' wide rather than 3' wide catwalk be constructed. Located 2475 Bay Ave., Mattituck. SCTM ~144-4-5 TRUSTEE GARRELL: Moved to approve the emended application dated 5/26/94 as per DEC request to lengthen catwalk to 80', TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded, all ayes 3' LINTON & DIANA D~ELL requests a Grandfather Pezmit to recons~ruc't a 3' X 60' dock and pilings. Located 450 West Bay Ave., Orient. SCTM $24-2-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve with 2 pilings, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES 1. Board tO set Public Hearing for the June 28, 1994 regular meeting for those applications that have received a Negative Declaration and the following applications that are Type II actions. a. En-Consultants Inc., on behalf of SARA GICALE to construct 1-3 ton capstone groin over existing deteriorating 33+' groin for purpose of erosion control, maximumpropesed elev. of groin = 7'3"+. Two yard payloader to be used for construction, will access construction site from end of Hamilton Ave. Located East Road, Cutchogue. SCTM ~110-7-17 Board of Trustees 35 May 26, 1994 TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to set hearing TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES b. Paul J. Heffernan on behalf of THERESA CASAMISINA requests a Wetland Permit for an existing 37' bulkhead and deck. Located 1195 Island View Lane, Greenport.. SCTM ~57-2-19 TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to set hearing, TRUSTEE ~BERTSON seconded, all ayes c. CHARLES & PENNY BURN~AMto renovate existing residence on property on same foot print except on southerly side where it will extend 30' No changes to existing septic system or well. Located Pine Neck Road, Southold. SCTM ~70-6-19 TRUSTEE GARRELL moved to set hearing, TRUSTEE AT~ERTSON seconded. ALL AYES d. C~RISTOPHER CONNORS requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single family dwelling with association sanitary system as per map dated August 31, 1992. TRUSTEE K~UPSKI moved to set hearing pending Town Attorney and Board reviewing file, TRUSTEE ALBERT$ON seconded. ALL AYES 4. Costello Marine Contr. on behalf of DONALD & VIRGINIA BAYLES requests a Grandfather Permit to resheath 220' of bulkhead landward side, replace backing system, backfill 10 yards of clean fill, and replace seven pilings inkind inplace. Located 785 Albacore Drive, Southold. SCTM #57-1-16.1 TRUSTEE HOLZAP~IEL moved to approve subject to providing a 50' vegetated buffer, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES 5. Board to review DR. NORA HICKE¥'S request to transfer dock Permit ~1332 from Frank Pileski to her. Located 345 Bartley Road, Mattituck. SCTM ~144-3-25 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve the transfer, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES 6. NARROW RI~ERMARINA - Channel Markers (see Resolution letter to Merle Wiggin) TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve as per letter, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. TRUSTEE WENCZEL abstained 7. a. Board to do Resolution regarding a 5 miles per hour speed limit in channel in all creeks and in all Town waters. TRUSTEE WENCZEL moved to approve, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES b. Board to request that Town Board do a resolution stating a. 5 miles per hour 300' off shore in Hallocks Bay and Mill Creek. (All as per wording of the Town Attorney and Bay Constable) TRUSTEE WENCZEL moved to approve, TRUSTEE ALBERTSON seconded. ALL AYES .Board of Trustees 36 May 26, 1994 c. Board to request to Town Board to put speed limit signs stating 5 mph. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI moved to approve, TRUSTEE WENCZEL seconded. ALL AYES 8. Board to do Resolution regarding Richmond Creek dredging. 9. Kostoulas - Violation of 1992 for constructing deck without permits. Board gave applicant two alternatives to what they actually constructed and applicant chose alternative #~1. A motion was made-by TRUSTEE KRUPSKI to grant approval as per alternative ~1 and the conditions of the permit, TRUSTEE HOLZAPHEL seconded. ALL AYES VII. MOORINGS: 1 HAROLD J. KOBER requests a mooring in Mud Creek for a 19' outboard with a 100 lb. mushroom. ACCESS: Roger Stoutenburg property or Mason Drive. Roger has given verbal approval but does not wish to put in writing for insurance reasons. Meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. TRUSTEE ALBERTSON moved to adjourn, TRUSTEE GARRELL seconded. ALL AYES Respectfully Submitted By: Diane J. Herbert, Clerk RECEIVED AND FfLED BY THE SQUTI-IOLD TOWN Cl.~.~ Town Clerk, Town of Southold